Around the Big Ten

[Mike]

The bucks? Everyone has questions about this team and its players.

And their fans.

[Dr. Strangelove]

And Michigan's defense was bad, ......

By what standard?

Michigan has moved from 110th in total defense in 2010 to 34th. They held WMU to under 5 yards per play ..... last year M was giving up over 7 yards per play. That is huge statistically.

M gave up 279 yards (< 100 rushing) to WMU just about 2/3 of what M gave up to UCONN (a BCS bowl teanm) in its opener one year ago (397y).

While its true its one game for 2011 versus a record of abysmal defense in 12 games in 2012, its a hell of a step up.

Before you open your mouth, it might help if you took a look at what's out there for anyone to see ..... like the facts.

Am I giddy? No. Its a long season, Shit happens. But M embarks on the season free of scandal and question marks about its conduct as a CFB program.

The bucks? Everyone has questions about this team and its players.

Ah well, who am I to question your wild optimism? After all, it's paid off handsomely for you the past few years.

34th in total defense! Michigan might be able to stay in that neighborhood so long as they make arrangements to end all games midway through the 3rd quarter.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Shouldn't you be in a Buckeye forum somewhere

I've posted with these guys for close to ten years now. It's been a fun 10 years

[Jamie H]

There was not enough info to make any declarations about the defense. What we know is that Western was able to complete a lot of short passes when Michigan brought no pressure, and was pretty much stuffed when Michigan decided to blitz. Michigan was owning the 3rd quarter, and I really doubt WMU would have rolled up a ton of yardage in the 4th unless Michigan put in the subs, which they very well could have.

I think making plays and forcing turnovers is a good step forward. But there is really no way you can judge all of the defensive changes based on 3 quarters of football against Western Michigan. But compared to watching UMass put up 37 on us, I'd say this was an improvement.

[lineygoblue]

We will know a lot more come Saturday evening along about midnight.

[iam416]

Why will you know "a lot more" after Notre Dame? Hell, RichGOD started 4-0 in 2009 and 5-0 in 2010, both with wins over mighty ND, and I guaratnee you what you thought you knew then sure wasn't what it turned out to be. And, again, the schedule is set up for 5-0/6-0 start before the real tests come -- and then they come in bunches.

[lineygoblue]

Why will you know "a lot more" after Notre Dame?

Well, for one thing we'll know if Michigan can live without Mike Barwis. After all, we haven't played a full game yet, and our conditioning may be suspect.

Also, we'll find out if Greg Mattison can coach after 9:00 pm. Since the guy is 62 years old, its liable to be past his bedtime, and we may need to have a cot on the sideline so he can take a nap during TV time outs.

And of course, we'll have to make sure that Brady Hoke doesn't wander outside Michigan Stadium to "drink every beer in Ann Arbor". That would be a bit messy ...

[drok]

You know Talent, if you don't like what Michigan fans are saying on a Michigan forum, you're welcome to head back to the place you were hiding while everyone was legitimately shitting on OSU for months.

No one here is under the delusion that we're setting up for a Conference Championship run this year, but there are small things that we haven't seen this team do in 3 years, like attack a passer, make in game adjustments, limit mental errors, finish the game stronger than how we started it. These are all little signs that the coaching staff has already made a positive impact and is headed in a direction that, frankly, we're all more comfortable with and have been hoping for. It's a hell of a lot better than the cluelessness we've experienced on D for the past 3 years.

The defense is mediocre at best, but if that holds it would be a huge improvement over dog shit terrible. They are still not good, don't have top end talent, and have terrible depth. But last year's D would not have made plays that disrupted the team (even against UMass they were powerless) - that's a huge step up. Last year's D would not have made adjustments that worked and would have relied on the offense to outscore the other team - that's a huge step up as well. We're not looking to go from 110th in D to top 20. If we get to 60th even there would be huge collective sigh of relief.

Notre Dame will tell us a whole heck of a lot more just by simple fact of having more than doubled our sample size of observable plays. Each game tells us more about the team, whether we choose to see it or not. Minus the turnovers, ND's offense is likely to be good. We'll see if our D is able to hold on, make some adjustments that slow them down enough, and give our offense a chance to steal the game.

[Niffla]

I'm respectfully weary of Notre Dame, but IMO we don't have to steal shit from them. We rolled into their house last year and beat them with a much less experienced team.

They're coming into the first ever prime time game at the Big House. If anything, they're gonna have to steal the game from us. Eff them.

[iam416]

You know Talent, if you don't like what Michigan fans are saying on a Michigan forum, you're welcome to head back to the place you were hiding while everyone was legitimately shitting on OSU for months.

I'm indifferent to what M fans are saying. Simply offering my opinion. Sorry. I'm fine leaving.

Though, I will come back, briefly, when the NCAA has its say on what you call "months" of "legitimately shitting on OSU." You're obviously not a fact man.

[drok]

Though, I will come back, briefly, when the NCAA has its say on what you call "months" of "legitimately shitting on OSU." You're obviously not a fact man.

So the facts are not that your coach lied to the NCAA and didn't own up to it until outside interests proved this was the case? Are the facts not that at least 5 players willingly accepted tats and/or gifts against NCAA rules? These are offenses that the OSU administration has already fired their coach for, suspended players, and dismissed one other player - not to mention vacate their entire last season. These are also facts, just in case you weren't sure.

Obviously the OSU administration thought these facts were "legitimate" enough to "shit on" these players of the football team, the coach of the football team, and the football team's entire 2010 season. Whether or not this is adequate punishment doesn't matter, as we're dealing with facts. If the OSU administration deemed it "legitimate" to take months to "shit on" different aspects of the OSU football team, it may not be "factual" but I think it would be reasonable for UM fans to legitimately shit on OSU for months as well.

But that's besides the point since you decided to completely ignore the other fact that I factually proved: that we would know more about the defense/team after more than doubling the amount of time observing them with the completion of the Notre Dame game. This is in direct conflict with your assertion that we won't know more - which factually doesn't make sense.

Instead of directly addressing this valid argument, you decided that the facts weren't in your favour (Canadian spelling) and offered to leave once again, just like you did once the facts about the OSU football team's cheating ways came out.

[lineygoblue]

Watch out, Drok .. he's about to remind you of the dominance of the Saint Jim era ...

[drok]

Hehe

I'm done arguing for the day anyway. Time to start cooking...

[Optimus Prime]

Beating Notre Dame means everything, when two venerable giants take to gridiron, a little reverence is in order here. Christ AA & SB invented college football!

Typically the Victor's fortune rises and as for the vanquished, well their season's tone is diminished.

Don't kid yourself, next Saturday 8pm ET (Nationally televised) Michigan will likely set a new NCAA attendance record....America knows a good thing!

PS I working on tix as we speak, damn scalpers are crooks!

[Jeff Buchanan]

...... one thing I will offer in support of what is likely to be the final outcome of the NCAA's investigation into the osu affair of 2010/11, the facts did not support LOIC according to the NCAA's letter that was released in July. As Gene Smith is fond of saying, it was an isolated circumstance, involving a defined set of players and a head coach who made a bad error in judgment.

To put it another way, there was not, according to the NCAA, some kind of systematic cheating going on that reflected a corrupt compliance department, AD and President. The letter is out there in the public domain and it goes through all the things that the NCAA looked at. I've read it.

Did I like it's conclusions? No. Did I think a circumstantial case could be made that supported a finding of LOIC? Definitely. Does the recent revelation of three more players accepting inappropriate benefits support a finding that there is a failure to promote an atmosphere of compliance that someone is responsible for within the osu athletic department? Yes.

The circumstances support a conclusion that there is a stink around the osu football program involving pay for play that affects recruiting and not a small number of osu football players already on the roster. Apparently, the NCAA thinks its fine if osu simply reports all the documented (factual) crap that goes on with players in a timely manner and all is well. Other than education of football staff and players, which osu reportedly has done a good job, the NCAA does not believe, in osu's case, that some kind of reduction in the number of reported violations might show (in a factual manner) that what osu is doing to insure compliance is actually working.

I don't believe it is and I'm not changing my mind about that view any more than talent is going to change his mind that the program is clean and jim tressel, besides making a single error in judgment that cost him and osu, is a good man and a great football coach. On the contrary, he is a hypocritical liar in the mold of Richard Nixon both of whom failed to see the enormous negative impact of their respective behaviors on the institutions they worked in.

I can't support my view with facts (other than the obvious one) and if all of this were a criminal proceeding, talent is spot on when he claims the facts don't support some of the conclusions that have been made about osu and about jim tressel. But the circumstances do support many of them.

My biggest disappointment in all of this is that the NCAA did not need to have a factual basis upon which they could have found LOIC (upping the ante for punishments). They could have found, like they did in the USC case, that things just didn't add up or make sense (and to me plenty of it didn't). Therefore, if the NCAA does not impose scholarship losses and post season bans at some level commensurate with what they did to USC, they expose themselves to being labeled inconsistent by treating one program differently than another.

Sadly, I don't think they will. Smith's and Gee's influence among members of the NCAA has probably been meaningful in all of this. There are just too many powerful people aligned to thwart any kind of punishment for osu that would hurt their bottom line and there will be scads of excuses that we will never hear among the CFB poobahs of why this is a good thing.